Supreme Court case information
Listed below are the substantive Supreme Court cases for the year along with appeals still to be determined or cases awaiting hearing.
Information giving an overview of the case is included along with media releases and links to judgments being appealed when available.
All 2024 - 2014 Supreme Court cases dismissed or deemed to be dismissed where a notice of abandonment was received can be found here.
Transcripts for cases heard before the Supreme Court are included provided they are not suppressed. Transcripts from pre-trial hearings are not published until the final disposition of trial. These are unedited transcripts and they are not a formal record of the Court’s proceedings. The Ministry of Justice does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any material and recommends that users exercise their own skill and care with respect to its use.
3 July 2026
Case information summary (as at 3 July 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 88 KB)
Case information summary (as at 3 July 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 127 KB)
All years
Case name
Nikala Janice Taylor v Christopher Dean Jones
Case number
SC 88/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – applicant implicated in abduction of child – orders made against applicant by High Court pursuant to application under Habeas Corpus Act 2001 – standard of proof applicable in ordering that person in shoes of applicant release another person from detention – whether sufficient evidential basis to justify making of orders – whether Court of Appeal erred in disclaiming jurisdiction to hear appeal against orders on basis that they were interim rather than final – whether Court of Appeal erred in affirming High Court’s direction for oral examination of applicant – adequacy of interim orders made by Court of Appeal to protect applicant against self-incrimination.CA 2302006 10 November 2006
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
6 December 2006
__________________________________
Appeal allowed. Orders made in the High Court quashed. Supression of name to lapse at 9 am on 7 December 2006. Costs reserved. Reasons to be given later.
6 December 2006
__________________________________
Appeal allowed. Orders made in the High Court quashed. Supression of name to lapse at 9 am on 7 December 2006. Costs reserved. Reasons to be given later.
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Leave judgment
Transcript
Case name
Kay Halton Skelton v Christopher Dean Jones
Case number
SC 90/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – abduction of parties’ child – applicant currently imprisoned for contempt for non-compliance with orders made by High Court under Habeas Corpus Act 2001 –appeal to Court of Appeal abandoned following decision now subject of application for leave to appeal in SC 88/2006 – applicant also facing criminal proceedings in relation to abduction – whether habeas corpus proceedings in High Court should be stayed or struck out as abuse of process – whether breach of natural justice prior to orders being made – whether sufficient evidential basis for orders – whether orders interim or final – whether High Court, having ordered release of child in discharge of its function under the Habeas Corpus Act, lacked jurisdiction to make further orders relating to swearing of affidavit by, and cross-examination of, applicant – whether orders, with or without accompanying safeguards, breached applicant’s right to silence as a person charged with a criminal offence (s 25 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990).CIV 2006 419 1489 18 October 2006
Result
6 December 2006
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs reserved. Reasons to be given later.
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs reserved. Reasons to be given later.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Additional document
SKELTON v JONES SC 90/2006 [20 August 2009] (PDF, 10 KB)
Substantive judgment
Reasons for judgmnet
Transcript
Case name
Josko Sestan v The Director of Area Mental Health Services, Waitemata District Health Board
Case number
SC 94/2006
Summary
Civil– application to appeal from decision of the Court of Appeal declining to issue writ of habeas corpus – whether a person detained under the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment Act) 1992 has all the rights of a person detained contained in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether Court of Appeal erred in wrongly or inadequately analysing whether the applicant was mentally disordered – whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to place burden properly on respondent to show mental disorder – whether reasons for dangerousness finding sufficient – whether Family Court and Court of Appeal erred in finding applicant was mentally disordered – whether inadequate reasons given for finding of mental disorder – whether applicant wrongly deprived of due process rights.CA 254/06 12 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
15 February 2007
_________________________
Application for costs dismissed.
7 March 2007
15 February 2007
_________________________
Application for costs dismissed.
7 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HITCHINGS v R SC 98/2006 [9 March 2007] (PDF, 19 KB)
Additional document
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (COSTS) (PDF, 14 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Transcription
Case name
Southbourne Investments Limited v Greenmount Manufacturing Limited
Case number
SC 96/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – option in deed of lease to purchase the relevant land - lessee’s purported exercise of option rejected by lessor because the exercise allegedly failed to conform with terms of the option – Court of Appeal, applying the Reporoa Stores “exact compliance” test, held that the option was validly exercised – whether the Court of Appeal in substance applied the “exact compliance” test – whether there was in fact “exact compliance” with the terms of the option. CA 90/06 21 November 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
20 April 2007
___________________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders for summary judgment and specific performance are set aside.
The proceeding is remitted to the High Court.
The appellant is awarded costs in this Court of $13,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appellant is awarded costs in that Court of $3,000.
2 August 2007
20 April 2007
___________________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders for summary judgment and specific performance are set aside.
The proceeding is remitted to the High Court.
The appellant is awarded costs in this Court of $13,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appellant is awarded costs in that Court of $3,000.
2 August 2007
Transcripts
- Hearing date 16 April 2007 (PDF, 138 KB)
Media Releases
- mediarelease southbourneinvestments 000 (PDF, 88 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Additional document
Transcript Hearing date 28 June 2007 (PDF, 346 KB)
Substantive judgment
Case name
Bernard John Pavitt v The Queen
Case number
SC 7/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal against conviction for aggravated robbery - whether colour of right - whether evidence inadmissable as unfairly obtained - burden of proof - whether misdirection by trial judge in telling jury that two others involved in the offending had also been charged. CA 257/04 21 October 2004
Result
Leave to appeal refused.
10 May 2005
10 May 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
PAVITT V R SC 7/2005 [10 May 2005] (PDF, 15 KB)
Case name
Lesley Jane Martin
Case number
SC 9/2005
Summary
Appeal against conviction for attempted murder - whether the Court of Appeal's application of the proviso in s385(1) Crimes Act 1961 was erroneous in law or in fact - whether breach of the right to fair trial, as guaranteed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, is so fundamental a breach that it will ipso facto give rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice. CA 257/04 21 October 2004
Result
Leave to appeal refused.
15 June 2005
15 June 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MARTIN V R SC SC 9/2005 [15 June 2005] (PDF, 23 KB)
Transcript
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Fa'afete Taito v The Queen
Case number
SC 10/2005
Summary
Appeal against conviction for aggravated robbery - whether the absence of a transcript of the Judge's summing up; alleged counsel incompetence; the size of the jury panel, and the manner in which the jury was empanelled give rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice - whether the approach to the question of undue delay was erroneous in law. CA 257/04 21 October 2004
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed.
17 June 2005
17 June 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TAITO V R SC 10/2005 [17 June 2005] (PDF, 16 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
James Alfred Hood, Robert George Hood, Kenneth John Hood v The Attorney-General and The Queenstown Lakes District Council
Case number
SC 11/2005
Summary
Civil appeal - land compulsorily acquired for public works no longer required - whether unreasonable or unfair to offer land back under s 40(2) Public Works Act 1981 - decision made by Minister other than the Minister empowered by statute - whether decision validated by s 25(e) Acts Interpretation Act 1924. CA 257/04 21 October 2004
Result
Leave to appeal declined. Costs to respondents $2,500 together with disbursements as settled by the Registrar.
5 August 2005
5 August 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Case name
Basil Steven Marshall Mist v The Queen
Case number
SC 12/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal - appeal against decision of the Court of Appeal imposing a sentence of preventive detention - whether Court erred in its interpretation of s 4(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 as dealing only with the situation where a new sentencing option became available between the time of the commission of the offence and the time of sentencing. CA 480/03 25 February 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
31 May 2005
_________________________
Appeal allowed.
Sentence of preventive detention quashed. Sentence imposed in the High Court reinstated but without prejudice to the Solicitor-General's submission that, in total, the finite sentences are manifestly inadequate. The question whether that is so is remitted to the Court of Appeal for determination.1 December 2005
31 May 2005
_________________________
Appeal allowed.
Sentence of preventive detention quashed. Sentence imposed in the High Court reinstated but without prejudice to the Solicitor-General's submission that, in total, the finite sentences are manifestly inadequate. The question whether that is so is remitted to the Court of Appeal for determination.1 December 2005
Leave judgment - leave granted
MIST V R SC 12/2005 [31 May 2005] (PDF, 15 KB)
Substantive judgment
MIST V R SC 12/2005 [1 December 2005] (PDF, 182 KB)
Transcription
Case name
Kenneth Christopher Morgan v The Superintendent, Rimutaka Prison
Case number
SC 13/2005
Summary
Habeas Corpus - whether the Parole Act 2002 applies on its terms to a person convicted prior to its enactment, but sentenced after its enactment - meaning of "penalty" in terms of s6 Sentencing Act 2002. CA 17/05 7 March 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.
19 May 2005
19 May 2005
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Page 29 of 32